1. Field
The disclosed and claimed concept relates generally to handheld electronic devices and, more particularly, to handheld electronic devices and methods that enable ambiguous word review or correction using a touch screen.
2. Description of the Related Art
Numerous types of handheld electronic devices are known. Examples of such handheld electronic devices include, for instance, personal data assistants (PDAs), handheld computers, two-way pagers, cellular telephones, and the like. Many handheld electronic devices also feature wireless communication capability, although many such handheld electronic devices are stand-alone devices that are functional without communication with other devices. Such handheld electronic devices are generally intended to be portable, and thus are of a relatively compact configuration in which keys and other input structures often perform a plurality of functions under certain circumstances or may otherwise have a plurality of aspects or features assigned thereto. As a practical matter, the keys of a keypad can only be reduced to a certain small size before the keys become relatively unusable. In order to enable text entry, however, a keypad must be capable of entering all twenty-six letters of the Roman alphabet, for instance, as well as appropriate punctuation and other symbols.
One way of providing numerous letters in a small space has been to provide a “reduced keyboard” in which a plurality of letters, symbols, and/or digits, and the like, are assigned to any given key. For example, a touch-tone telephone includes a reduced keypad by providing twelve keys, of which ten have digits thereon, and of these ten keys eight have Roman letters assigned thereto. For instance, one of the keys includes the digit “2” as well as the letters “A”, “B”, and “C”. Other known reduced keyboards have included other arrangements of keys, letters, symbols, digits, and the like. Since a single actuation of such a key potentially could be intended by the user to refer to any of the letters “A”, “B”, and “C”, and potentially could also be intended to refer to the digit “2”, the input generally is an ambiguous input and is in need of some type of disambiguation in order to be useful for text entry purposes.
In order to enable a user to make use of the plural letters, digits, and the like on any given key, numerous keystroke interpretation systems have been provided. For instance, a “multi-tap” system allows a user to substantially unambiguously specify a particular character on a key by pressing the same key a number of times equivalent to the position of the desired character on the key. Another example keystroke interpretation system is key chording, of which various types exist. For instance, a particular character can be entered by pressing two keys in succession or by pressing and holding first key while pressing a second key. Still another keystroke interpretation system is a “press-and-hold/press-and-release” interpretation function in which a given key provides a first result if the key is pressed and immediately released, and provides a second result if the key is pressed and held for a short period of time.
Another keystroke interpretation system is a software-based text disambiguation function. In such a system, a user typically presses keys to which one or more characters have been assigned, generally pressing each key one time for each desired letter, and the disambiguation software attempts to predict the intended input. Numerous different systems have been proposed. See, for example, U.S. Patent Application Publication Nos. 2006/0007120 and 2006/0007121; and U.S. Pat. No. 5,953,541. For example, as a user enters keystrokes, the device provides output in the form of a default output and a number of variants from which a user can choose. The output is based largely upon the frequency, i.e., the likelihood that a user intended a particular output, but various features of the device provide additional variants that are not based solely on frequency and rather are provided by various logic structures resident on the device. The device enables editing during text entry and also provides a learning function that allows the disambiguation function to adapt to provide a customized experience for the user. Additionally, the device can facilitate the selection of variants by displaying a graphic of a special <NEXT> key of the keypad that enables a user to progressively select variants generally without changing the position of the user's hands on the device.
Some handheld electronic devices employ a reduced keyboard and disambiguation software with a word list of over, for example, 35,000 words and the ability to increase that list based on the frequency of use and the names and addresses in a local address book. When typing on such a device, it is not uncommon to have a key sequence represent multiple possible words (e.g., “are” and “see” are the result of the same key sequence). If composing a message, for example, the result is that the sender may have to carefully watch what is being entered as it is typed, and perhaps review the message when it is finished to make sure the correct words have been used. If the sender doesn't do this, then the message could contain unintended alternative words, and the receiver would then need to try and make sense of the errors in the message. This is especially bad if the receiver is unaware that a reduced keyboard and disambiguation software was used with the original message because that receiver wouldn't be expecting unintended word replacements in the message.
Some handheld electronic devices employ keyboards and disambiguation or predictive software that works so well that the user's typed message is often determined correctly even if the user completely ignores displayed lists of suggested words. Since typing is faster if the user ignores the displayed lists of suggested words and since the message is usually determined correctly anyway, the user may get in the habit of ignoring the displayed lists of suggested words. However, there are certain combinations of words that such devices do get wrong. Examples of such suspect word combinations include: have/gave; see/are; about/snout; yet/try; hate/gate; there/three; test/tray; dear/fear; hit/guy; info/undo; is/us; yes/tea; sick/suck; busy/bust; but/bit/buy/nut/nit. For example, the problem with the word combination including “have” and “gave” is caused by a keyboard key that includes both of the letters “h” and “g”. Also, the device may not get certain words correct if they are not in the device's dictionary. Hence, because of the user's habit of ignoring displayed lists of suggested words, the user may end up sending an incorrect message or spending extra time to review the message after composition.
With disambiguation and other predictive text input methods, there are several times that the handheld electronic device can choose an incorrect word when two words are ambiguous and interchangeable. For example, there are the phrases: “Are you there?” and “See you there!”. This includes the above-described suspect word combination: see/are.
There is room for improvement in handheld electronic devices.
There is also room for improvement in methods of reviewing or correcting ambiguous words.
Similar numerals refer to similar parts throughout the specification.